Form I NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
THIRD DIVISION
Award No. 39492
Docket No. SG-38864
09-3-NRAB-00003-050299
(05-3-299)
The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee
Edwin H. Beim, when award was rendered.
Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
(Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Rail
( Corporation (Metra)
STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
"Claim on behalf of the Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen on the
Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Rail Corp.:
Claim on behalf of 3. W. Price, for 24 hours at the overtime rate of
pay, account Carrier violated the current Signalmen's Agreement,
particularly Rule 15 and Side Letter No. 10 (SET letter dated
October 24, 1989) when Carrier allowed signal employees junior to
the Claimant on the NIRCRC Seniority Roster of Signal
Department Employees to work overtime service on March I and 2,
2003 on Metra's Milwaukee District at J16, and not the Claimant
who customarily performs maintenance, installation and repair on
the equipment involved in this claim, during regular hours and
outside regular hours. Carrier's actions denied the Claimant of this
overtime work opportunity. Carrier's File No. 11-28-403. General
Chairman's File No. 13-M-03. BRS File Case No. 12991-NIRC."
FINDINGS:
The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the
evidence, finds that:
Form 1 Award No. 39492
Page 2 Docket No. SG-38864
09-3-NRAB-00003-050299
(05-3-299)
The carrier or carriers and the employee or employees involved in this dispute
are respectively carrier and employee within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act,
as approved June 21, 1934.
This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute
involved herein.
Parties to said dispute were given due notice
of
hearing thereon.
The Claimant, a Signal Electronic Technician (SET), is the same individual
involved in Third Division Award 39491.
In this matter, the Claimant asserts an overtime entitlement to work
performed on March I and 2, 2003. In Third Division Award 39491, the Board
held:
"Side Letter No. 10 addresses the establishment of the SET position.
However, Side Letter No. 10 does not obligate the Carrier to assign
the Claimant the disputed overtime work merely because he held an
SET position. On the contrary, Side Letter No. 10 specifically states
that "[t]his rule shall not be construed as prohibiting Signal
Maintainers or other qualified Signalmen from making test,
inspections and repairs as necessary." [Emphasis added]. The
Claimant gains no assignment rights from Side Letter 10 for the
disputed work.
Rule 15 also does not help the Claimant's asserted entitlement to the
work. In pertinent part, Rule 15 states that "[w1hen overtime is
required of a part of a group of employees who customarily work
together, the senior qualified available employees
of
the class
involved shall have preference to such overtime if they so desire." In
its July 3, 2003 letter at Note 2, the Carrier asserts that the
". . . [C]laimant is not a member
of
a group
of
employees who
customarily work together." That assertion was not refuted on the
Form 1 Award No. 39492
Page 3 Docket No. SG-38864
09-3-NRAB-00003-050299
(05-3-299)
property. Rule 15 therefore does not give the Claimant assignment
rights for the disputed overtime work.
Throughout, the Carrier asserted that it deemed the workforce
selected was sufficient and qualified to perform the work. The
Organization failed to prove that determination violated any specific
Rule of the Agreement. But in order to prevail, that is what the
Organization must prove. The claim must therefore be denied."
Those reasons are equally applicable to this case.
AWARD
Claim denied.
ORDER
This Board, after consideration of the dispute identified above, hereby orders
that an Award favorable to the Claimant(s) not be made.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 2nd day of February 2009.